On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 16:59 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 12:19 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-06-14 at 22:02 +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > > When DNF will be able to install flatpack pkgs then we can stop
> > > supporting
> > > distro packages for that.
> > 
> > One of the things I am working on is making access to sources,
> > symbols
> > and debuginfo easier for rpm packages as distributed by Fedora. That
> > helps users profiling, debugging and tracing the things they run on
> > their systems. For some background see:
> > https://gnu.wildebeest.org/blog/mjw/2016/02/02/where-are-your-symbols
> > -debuginfo-and-sources/
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ParallelInstallableDebuginfo
> 
> Flatpak supports something called "extensions", where an app (or a
> runtime) can specify extension points which are then optionally there
> when running the app. One use of this in flatpak is debuginfo
> extensions for the case above (another is locale data). Also, if you
> use flatpak-builder to build your app then these are automatically
> built for you, similar to how rpm does it (which support for was also
> written by me).

O! I see in builder/builder-utils.c "This code is based on debugedit.c
from rpm". And I am just hacking on that for rpm (see some patches on
rpm-ma...@rpm.org). Maybe it is an idea to extract that code and provide
a "standalone" debugedit program that different packaging programs
(rpmbuild, flatpak-builder, ...) could use to collect build-ids and
debuginfo source path cleanups? What would be a good list to discuss
that? rpm-ecosystem, flatpak-devel?

Thanks,

Mark
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to